This is specific; I await ICANN's response.
At 03:00 PM 6/22/99 -0400, you wrote:
>On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
>
>> OK, document an action by the Board that was a lie or was deceptive in some
>> other way. Because "Fraud must be pled with particularity", be specific as
>
>Don't know if it rises quite to the level of "dishonest" (although I know
>people who would characterize it that way, or spin theories as to why it
>reveals dishonesty), but there is something odd and uncomfortable about
>the juxtaposition between between the Board resolution on WIPO (a mixture
>of endorsement in principle & studied non-endorsement in principle) and
>the simultaneous press communique which says that the Board likes the
>WIPO principles so much it wishes to expand them to all DN related
>commercial disputes.
>
>The combination certainly leaves open the supposition that there were
>other resolutions not revealed, or that the resolutions don't express the
>Board's true views. A hint not lost on the DNSO's by the way.
>
>
>--
>A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
>+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
> --> It's hot here. <--
>
>
>
